Osteoarthritis (OA) is a condition that can cause substantial pain, loss of joint function, and a decline in quality of life in patients. Numerous risk factors, including aging, genetics, and injury, have a role in the onset of OA, characterized by structural changes within the joints. Most therapeutic approaches focus on the symptoms and try to change or improve the structure of the joint tissues. Even so, no treatments have been able to stop or slow the progression of OA or give effective and long-lasting relief of symptoms. In the absence of disease-modifying drugs, regenerative medicine is being investigated as a possible treatment that can change the course of OA by changing the structure of damaged articular cartilage. In regenerative therapy for OA, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been the mainstay of translational investigations and clinical applications. In recent years, MSCs have been discovered to be an appropriate cell source for treating OA due to their ability to expand rapidly in culture, their nontumorigenic nature, and their ease of collection. MSCs’ anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory capabilities may provide a more favorable local environment for the regeneration of injured articular cartilage, which was thought to be one of the reasons why they were seen as more suited for OA. In addition to bone marrow, MSCs have also been isolated from adipose tissue, synovium, umbilical cord, cord blood, dental pulp, placenta, periosteum, and skeletal muscle. Adipose tissue and bone marrow are two of the most essential tissues for therapeutic MSCs. Positive preclinical and clinical trial results have shown that, despite current limitations and risks, MSC-based therapy is becoming a promising approach to regenerative medicine in treating OA.

Background: Chondral defects in the knee present a significant challenge due to their limited self-healing capacity, often leading to joint degeneration and functional disability. Current treatments, including surgical approaches like mosaicplasty and regenerative therapies such as bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) augmentation, aim to address these defects and improve patient outcomes. Materials and Methods: This study conducted a single-center, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment approaches and rehabilitation protocols for chondral defects. Thirty-seven subjects presenting with symptomatic chondral or osteochondral defects (>3 cm²) in the weight-bearing region of the femoral condyle were partitioned into three groups, and underwent mosaicplasty with or without BMAC augmentation, followed by either a 6-week or 12-week rehabilitation program. Group 1 (n = 10) received mosaicplasty combined with BMAC augmentation and engaged in a twelve-week two-phase rehabilitation protocol. Group 2 (n = 15) underwent mosaicplasty alone and participated in the same twelve-week two-phase rehabilitation regimen. Meanwhile, Group 3 (n = 12) underwent mosaicplasty and underwent a shorter six-week one-phase rehabilitation program. Clinical assessments were performed using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, goniometry for the knee’s range of motion (ROM), manual muscle testing (MMT) for quadricep strength, and the Western Ontario and McMaster University Arthritis Index (WOMAC) for functional evaluation in three test phases. Results: Significant differences in WOMAC scale scores were observed between the three groups at the intermediate (F(2, 34) = 5.24, p < 0.010) and final (F(2, 34) = 111, p < 0.000) stages, with post hoc Tukey tests revealing variations shared among all three groups. The between-group analysis of the VAS scale demonstrated no statistically significant difference initially (F(2, 34) = 0.18, p < 0.982), but significant differences emerged following the intermediate (F(2, 34) = 11.40, p < 0.000) and final assessments (F(2, 34) = 59.87, p < 0.000), with post hoc Tukey tests revealing specific group variations, notably between Group 1 and both Group 2 and Group 3, and also between Group 3 and Group 2. The between-group analysis of quadricep muscle strength using MMT scores revealed no statistically significant differences initially (F(2, 34) = 0.376, p < 0.689) or following the intermediate assessment (F(2, 34) = 2.090, p < 0.139). The one-way ANOVA analysis showed no significant difference in the knee ROM initially (F(2, 34) = 1.037, p < 0.366), but significant differences emerged following intermediate (F(2, 34) = 9.38, p < 0.001) and final assessments (F(2, 34) = 11.60, p < 0.000). Post hoc Tukey tests revealed significant differences between Groups 1 and 2, Groups 1 and 3, and Groups 2 and 3 at intermediate and final assessments. Conclusions: The patients who received BMAC augmentation and completed a 12-week rehabilitation protocol had significantly better outcomes in pain relief, knee function, and ROM when compared to those who did not receive BMAC augmentation or those who completed a shorter rehabilitation period. Our findings suggest that combining mosaicplasty with BMAC augmentation and a comprehensive rehabilitation program can lead to superior clinical outcomes for patients with chondral defects in the knee.

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of different rehabilitation protocols following osteochondral autograft transplantation (OAT) in patients with focal osteochondral defects of the femoral condyle, using the MOCART 2.0 knee score as a primary imaging outcome. Twenty-nine patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 (n = 9) received OAT with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and a 12-week two-phase rehabilitation program; Group 2 (n = 11) received OAT with a 12-week program without BMAC; and Group 3 (n = 9) received OAT with a shortened 6-week program. At the 12-month follow-up, Group 1 demonstrated a superior cartilage repair quality, with the highest mean MOCART 2.0 score (96.1), compared to Group 2 (80.2) and Group 3 (71.7). Notably, complete defect filling was observed in five patients in Group 1 versus four in Group 2 and only one in Group 3. The integration and surface integrity were also better preserved in Group 1. The addition of BMAC and an extended, progressive rehabilitation protocol significantly enhanced the morphological cartilage repair parameters. These results suggest that a biologically enhanced and prolonged recovery plan may offer a greater structural restoration of cartilage after OAT than conventional or accelerated protocols.

Background: Focal chondral lesions of the knee are frequently underdiagnosed, and their clinical presentation does not always correlate with structural severity. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of clinical examination tests and musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSK-US) in identifying high-grade chondral defects, using MRI-based ICRS grading as the reference standard. Methods: In this observational cross-sectional study, 57 consecutive patients with mechanical knee pain and MRI-confirmed focal chondral lesions were evaluated through standardized clinical examination, MSK-US, and MRI. Clinical maneuvers—including Wilson’s test, McMurray’s test, and ligamentous stability tests—were analyzed using Chi-square tests, Pearson correlations, and odds ratios (OR). Statistical processing was performed in Python. Results: According to MRI grading, 87.7% of lesions were ICRS 3, and 12.3% were ICRS 4. Pain and functional impairment (as measured by the WOMAC) were moderate and comparable across lesion grades. Wilson’s test showed high sensitivity in both ICRS 3 (66%) and ICRS 4 (100%) lesions, but no statistical association with lesion severity (p = 0.955). McMurray’s test demonstrated strong discriminative value, being positive in 30% of ICRS 3 versus 86% of ICRS 4 lesions, and was the only clinical maneuver significantly associated with lesion grade (χ² = 4.29, p = 0.038; OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05–0.79). Correlation analysis revealed weak associations between clinical tests and the location of compartment-specific defects. MRI identified meniscal tears in 86% of ICRS 4 lesions compared with 30% of ICRS 3 lesions. Conclusions: Symptom severity alone does not reliably distinguish between ICRS Grade 3 and Grade 4 focal chondral lesions. McMurray’s test, while not cartilage-specific, was associated with lesion complexity due to its reflection of concomitant meniscal pathology rather than cartilage depth itself. Accordingly, McMurray’s test should be interpreted as an indirect clinical indicator of combined osteochondral–meniscal involvement. The integration of targeted clinical tests (Wilson’s and McMurray’s), MSK-US and MRI-based ICRS grading may support clinical orientation and preoperative risk stratification, forming a pragmatic diagnostic framework rather than a definitive staging tool.